STATE OF NEW YORK
                      DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                               JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433

          -----------------------------------X 
          IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE      
          APPEAL OF

                                                   ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
                                                   DOCKET NO.: FL210067RO    
                                                
          HERON MANAGEMENT, Ltd./
          JOSEPH BABECKI,
                                                   DISTRICT RENT           
                                                   ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                   DOCKET NO.: DL210483S     
                  
                                PETITIONER         SUBJECT PREMISES:
                                                   2080 Ocean Ave.           
                                                   Apt.4c,
                                                   Brooklyn, NY   
          -----------------------------------X                           
              
               ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

            The above-named owner filed a timely petition for administrative 
            review of an order issued on November 26, 1991 concerning the 
            housing accommodations relating to the above-described docket 
            number.  

            The Commissioner has reviewed all the evidence in the record and has 
            carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the 
            issues raised by the petition.

            The issue in this appeal is whether the Administrator's order was 
            warranted.

            On December 11, 1989, the tenant commenced this proceeding by filing 
            a complaint asserting that the owner had failed to maintain certain 
            services in the subject apartment.

            On January 19, 1990, DHCR transmitted a copy of the tenant's 
            complaint to the owner.

            In its answer filed on January 25, 1990, the owner asserted that the 
            tenant has not responded to the certified letter requesting access. 
            The owner submitted proof of certified mailing and return receipt.
















            FL210067RO

            On January 22, 1991 and March 8, 1991, DHCR informed the owner of 
            the procedures for scheduling a No Access inspection.  There is no 
            indication in the record below that the owner complied with 
            requirements set forth therein.  Accordingly a routine inspection of 
            the subject apartment was conducted on June 17, 1991 by a DHCR staff 
            member who reported that the handle on the shower sliding door is 
            broken and that the air conditioning unit located under the right 
            side window has been emptied, allowing air seepage into the bedroom.  
            A re-inspection was conducted on October 22, 1991 which investigated 
            and confirmed the complaint of air seepage from the living room air 
            conditioner sleeve, not addressed in the initial inspection request.

            Based on these inspections, the Administrator issued an order on 
            November 26, 1991 that directed restoration of these services and 
            further ordered a reduction of the stabilized rent.

            In the petition for administrative review, the owner contends as 
            below, that the tenant continuously refused access; submits a court 
            stipulation dated May 7, 1991, signed by the tenant, indicating 
            tenant's withdrawal of all pending DHCR complaints; and asserts that 
            all repairs have been completed.

            On January 7, 1992, DHCR mailed a copy of the owner's petition to 
            the tenant, who interposed an answer.

            After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion that 
            the petition should be denied.

            The Administrator's determination was based upon two on-site 
            inspections conducted by a staff member who confirmed the existence 
            of defective conditions. The owner does not dispute the results of 
            these inspections. 

            The bare assertion of completed repairs, and the claim and evidence 
            of tenant's withdrawal of DHCR complaints in a court stipulation, 
            were not presented in the proceeding below prior to the issuance of 
            the Administrator's order, but are raised for the first time on 
            appeal. As such, these matters are beyond the scope of 
            administrative review which is limited to a review the issues and 
            evidence before the Administrator, and not to consider new claims 
            and evidence.

            The owner's claim that the tenants withdrew the complaint is also 
            defective in light of Section 2520.13 of the Rent Stabilization 
            Code, which sets forth that a tenant may negotiate a settlement in 
            a court competent jurisdiction to withdraw a complaint pending 
            before the DHCR, provided the tenant is represented by Counsel.  
            There is no evidence presented, nor is it alleged by either party, 
            that the tenant was properly represented.  In fact, the owner's 
            petition suggests that the Court has since recognized that the 
            tenant was "incapable of diealing with the above Court directives".








            FL210067RO


            The determination below was proper in light of the record below, and 
            should be sustained.

            THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code, 
            it is

            ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied, and 
            that the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.

            ISSUED:


                                                                         
                                            JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                            Deputy Commissioner









    

TenantNet Home | TenantNet Forum | New York Tenant Information
DHCR Information | DHCR Decisions | Housing Court Decisions | New York Rent Laws
Disclaimer | Privacy Policy | Contact Us

Subscribe to our Mailing List!
Your Email      Full Name